The overuse of a noise reduction application (such as NeatImage, Noise Ninja, Noise Reduction in a RAW converter, etc.) or similar smoothing technique has left your image with a smoothed appearance thus, degrading the image detail.

http://ge.tt/2hRNuuT/v/0

It's my first upload to iStock, and I didn't deliberately reduce the noise. I merely used Windows Live Photo Gallery to edit the highlights, contrast, and maybe shadows, after which I photoshopped the details like logos and the mall's name (using the clone stamp tool).

After seeing the iStockphoto standards on Noise, I still can't see what is the difference between the various noise reduction techniques. Could someone please explain them to me?

Here's a second version where I only photoshopped the logos and mall's name.

Hi your photo was shot at ISO 2000 with a Canon550D. The use of ISO 2000 has the camera kick in it's high ISO noise reduction unless you have this default turned off. Typically you can see noise reduction has been applied when an image loses its texture details. You picture you can't see details in the pine needles of the trees just a blurred dark green mushy look. To take a photo like you have submitted at a Stock standard you would need a tripod set up with a long enough exposure to properly expose the textures in the tree... as a starter. It's an interesting shot, just not the technical standard needed for stock. Typically stock shots will be shot at the lowest possible iso's to maintain the least noise possible. 100 or 200 iso at first is probably all you want to use. higher Iso's are possible with highly skilled post processing, though ISO 2000 that this was shot at, would be difficult to bring in to stock standard at any time.

If you post your photos you are considering submitting here you will have others pipe in on what is needed to bring them to a stock standard or if they can be brought to that standard. and lots of help. But you'll need to realize that stock is quite different then just taking a pretty photo or creative photo. If you read over the past forum submissions it will give you a much stronger ideal of what is acceptable for stock also. Google any terms you don't understand and you should get lots of information that way also.

I like your photo, good composition, great timing and it is not that far off from technical standards here. First thing that catches my eye is Chromatic Aberration aka Purple Fringing, typically seen in high contrast areas (look at snow flakes close to corners of the image). That itself causes rejection.

You should capture images in RAW format for iStock use. Than you can have full control over final JPG file.

Your file can be salvaged by simply reducing size to 3000x2000 pixels and smart sharpen it somewhat.

Hi your photo was shot at ISO 2000 with a Canon550D. The use of ISO 2000 has the camera kick in it's high ISO noise reduction unless you have this default turned off. Typically you can see noise reduction has been applied when an image loses its texture details. You picture you can't see details in the pine needles of the trees just a blurred dark green mushy look. To take a photo like you have submitted at a Stock standard you would need a tripod set up with a long enough exposure to properly expose the textures in the tree... as a starter. It's an interesting shot, just not the technical standard needed for stock. Typically stock shots will be shot at the lowest possible iso's to maintain the least noise possible. 100 or 200 iso at first is probably all you want to use. higher Iso's are possible with highly skilled post processing, though ISO 2000 that this was shot at, would be difficult to bring in to stock standard at any time.

Ah I see now that makes more sense on why iStockphoto says I used noise reduction programs. I'll disable that on my cam. I'll also take note not to use too high an ISO (it was on Auto).

This shot was taken without a tripod as it was somewhat an unplanned outing, which is a pity.